Why not? I think just by the mere fact we log onto A.Net we all love a good (but clean) debate. Besides, when has a topic like this not turned into an A v. B forum?
On to the topic at hand, I can tell you some know-it-alls (no names mentioned but we all know who they are) will want to know what the circumstances were for the damage. And you can add me to those who want to know. By way of example, did the damage occur during a test that took the a/c outside of it's designed performance parameters??
Liedetectors From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 360 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 23444 times:
Results of landing gear abuse tests. Tug was used and a/c steering system was shut off to prevent gears from steering. Plane was then tugged into a 90 degree turn. Tires and possibly wheels were damaged, but the gears didnt snap or fold in. Test was successful.
RedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4214 posts, RR: 29 Reply 8, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 23344 times:
Liedetectors: I'll be damned! After 7 posts and not a single "the 380 is doomed to failure" comment. My, my, how A.Net has become so civil! I don't know if I should be sad or elated.
Another question: what are the requirements for the test to be deemed "successful"? Does she have to withstand such stresses without any damage whatsoever? Or are they looking to make sure the landing gear posts remain intact even if the tires did blow (which obviously they didn't)?
Liedetectors From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 360 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 23322 times:
I'd go with sad-the al.net crew is letting me down with no the world is going to end scenarios.
To answer your question, for the tests to be successful, the gear must withstand such scenarios 1) without entering the material region of plastic deformation and 2) without any cracks being formed. Checking for cracks is done either with a penetrant test or ultrasonically (preferred).
Liedetectors From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 360 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 23308 times:
A LIE HAS BEEN DETECTED! The rear axle of the main gear is steerable, but the steering system was in fact not active during this test. This is the same as can be found on the 777. A-380 wing gears are not steerable to the best of my knowledge.
Backing up, is the landing gear test to determine what would happen in case of a steering failure during landing/takeoff or to determine the effect of a steering loss during taxi necessitating quick removal from the taxiway or active ?
Liedetectors From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 360 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 23266 times:
Mainly to detect if incompetent and/or hurried tug operations can cause structural damage to the aircraft and/or the landing gear. The effect of losing the rear-axle steering should result in only tire scrubbing during taxi, which is acceptable unlike structural damage.
in the 2nd pic - when you watch the skidmarks, is that bitumen folding up?
Was thinking the same thing. I reckon it is cause it doesn't look like rubber. And the tyre looks normal not very worn. If it's rubber you should see the missing parts from the tyre. But on the other hand you can't really see where that tarmac should come from. It doesn't look folded up way down.
So maybe some specialist will shed some light on it..
There is one problem with airbus. Though their products are engineering marvels they lack passion, completely.
Pawsleykat From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 1978 posts, RR: 14 Reply 20, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 22565 times:
Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 8): and not a single "the 380 is doomed to failure" comment.
But why should the A380 be doomed to failure and not success?
And again, this is rich coming from me as 4 months ago I hated the bloody thing!
When you see the A380 from upclose - I believe - it's really cool. Seeing it with your own eyes and not those of a cameraman, you can understand the technology that goes into these planes and in a way you want it to be a success.
God, that was a great day at Toulouse. 27-4-2005.
First Class passengers are my favourites. They can't get any further forward without an ATPL.
Starlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 16360 posts, RR: 66 Reply 21, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 22475 times:
Quoting BaylorAirBear (Reply 6): So the tug pulled the plane sideways? Can someone paint me a better picture?
Quoting C133 (Reply 10): Does the A380 have steerable main gear or not?
IIRC, the wing gear and the last axle of each body gear is steerable. In a tight turn, the plane pivots around a point somewhere between the 4 main gear sets. If you turn off steering the wheels are forced sideways during a turn instead of following neatly. The rubber on the ground will of course resist this, resulting in damage.
Quoting Blue787 (Reply 17): Quoting Fumanchewd (Reply 4):
This was actually initiated by Ferrari for refusing to allow a change to the taxi
What has Airbus got to do with Ferrari???Stick to the subject matter.
I thought it was pretty funny. But I guess you have to follow Formula One to get the joke.
ËDIT: for clarity.
[Edited 2005-07-21 13:50:23]
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - from Citadel by John Ringo
Francoflier From France, joined Oct 2001, 3514 posts, RR: 11 Reply 22, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 22349 times:
I'm terribly sorry about my untrained eyes, but I don't see any sign of damage from any of those pictures (apart from apparent damage inflicted to the asphalt...)
Tires bent as they were supposed to, they're rubber, but if you place the a/c correctly on the ground again, i.e. remove the loads from the tires, they'll go back to their original shape, and I got 10 bucks that say they'll even be airworthy again...
Now the only damage that could be found is invisible damage such as cracks in the gear metal structure, but like that, from the pictures, it all looks good!
Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit posting...
Gearup From Canada, joined Dec 2000, 578 posts, RR: 1 Reply 23, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 22228 times:
This sort of test sure makes a mess of the tarmac. Given that the scrubbing tire dug into the asphalt and the tires were so deformed, I imagine the pull on the nose gear to turn the aircraft must have been significant. Must have used a powerful tug!
Flybyguy From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 1796 posts, RR: 1 Reply 24, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 22180 times:
Quoting Gearup (Reply 23): This sort of test sure makes a mess of the tarmac. Given that the scrubbing tire dug into the asphalt and the tires were so deformed, I imagine the pull on the nose gear to turn the aircraft must have been significant. Must have used a powerful tug!
The "pull" of the tug has nothing to do with it really it's just that the main gear are offset (underwing gear mostly in front of belly gear)
Turning this plane 90-degrees has the same effect on the main gear as turning a car (90-degrees for instance) on all four wheels around the transmission not a pretty sight unless all your wheels can steer.
"Are you a pretender... or a thoroughbred?!" - Professor Matt Miller
25 EuroBonus: Just wondered how big are the tyres exactly? More than 2 metres high? Would be great to be able to compare to other tyres.
26 NorCal: That is amazing that those tires stood up to that. I think the only thing that failed this test was the asphalt.
27 Harry: coool....nice photos thanks for the updates
28 C680: Having been around a tire that exploded due to over inflation, I was thinking that whoever took those photos was either a little nuts, or had no idea